On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 07:03:28PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > * libgd-noxpm-perl (built from exact same source) is in sarge.
Eh, why aren't both packages actually built from the same source package then? If they are two variants of the same package, they should be built from the same source. Since both packages are obsolete though, I don't think it's worth fixing this now. Fwiw, I couldn't find any reverse depends on either of those packages, not even in unstable, so why have these two packages in sarge anyway? > * Latest changes was regresssion test fixes only (and better packaging) > * The actual binary code has been unchanged for 2 years! > > > Personally I always use libgd-noxpm-perl instead of libgd-noxpm-perl, > but I have not yet succeeded convincing all depending packages to loosen > up their dependencies (causing me to use hacked "sideports" of those > packages for my own systems) so in fact this does cause problems for > some packages (because of too strict package dependencies only - I know > of no Debian package actually using XPM-support in GD). See above, there are no reverse dependencies that I could find. Maybe better just remove both? --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
